The first step would be to demolish all unnecessary hate speech codes; the second to identify radical and violent doctrines (and not the inoffensive ones) as an ideological enemy and see where that goes. Those who are afraid of an open process should ask themselves why the alternative is better. If they believe a system of dual-track government and sanctioned lying is superior because our sensitive souls are spared the sight of the truth, then what is the reason? But we may need a disaster to convince ourselves that the truth after all, will set us free.
In fairness to the bureaucracy, many of these â€œnoble liesâ€ were crafted to facilitate the conduct of diplomacy or adopted as realpolitik expedients. How could one do business with the Saudis unless one were prepared to put the best construction on their national ideology?
Fernandez is on the right track here, but in regards to the Saudis, he should have noted that they spread millions, perhaps billions of petrodollars of hard cash throughout the influential reaches of the ruling class in order to set a PC standard that is extremely favorable to Islam in America. Corporate board seats, foundation sinecures, and, probably, outright bribes are dispensed to ensure that Islam, even the Islam dedicated to our destruction, is off limits to all examination or criticism.